Swapping 5* In Limited Release Packs

Doc L

So, I know this rule has come up several seasons in a row now with the release of 5*, with a limited edition release, containing two other 5*. However, customer service has consistently said it will not swap for classic 5* pulled in these packs. I only pulled the two tokens I won from the event - I am saving my CP etc for trying to finish my 5* Thor who is two short - and 'luckily' pulled a 5* Panther. unfortunately, it was the only colour in my 5-1-2 Panther that is maxed. After being refused a swap today to another colour (on the grounds it was a pack I won from D3, so I felt like my reward then for finishing the Boss event was... 2,000 ISO. I realise it's not as simple as that, but that was my top prize), it got me thinking - 5* have been out for years now, and we have had classic packs for almost that long.

There must be an easy, better way than this. There has to be. 

Several things came to mind:

i) why aren't these limited release packs just assumed to be the same as latest packs? So just treat them the same way.

ii) if we aren't allowed to swap, why not simply only have the newest 5*, with two from the latest pack in there? So they could be dealt with the same way without breaking any rules.

Or even iii) why is a classic 5* cover not just equivalent to a certain amount of CP, or a new token pull (a la No More Guns tokens direct for OML)? I know some people at the top end would sell other 5* for more of others, or keep re-rolling forever, but that has to be better for the higher-to-lower guys to not waste covers.

Or while we're at it, iv) colourless covers.

I don't know, I'm not sure this is on the list to address this at D3 headquarters, and I know it's part of a bigger problem (which include 4* to 5* feeders as well), but given the nature of the tokens, being rewards for doing well, it seems completely contradictory that you then have to chuck away what you won, because the character is classified as a 'classic'. In all honesty, this whole system is confusing, and really doesn't help the player as much as it should. Champing helps, certainly, but only once you have 13 covers of a specific series of permutations of a character... Like... What? 

There has to be an easier way.

Pants1000

I like option 3.  It’s a poor use of CS time to mess with swaps.  They should just make 5* covers worth some CP or a new token, so selling unusable covers isn’t so painful.

Borstock

The whole swapping policy was a dumb idea. They never should've implemented it in the first place. It should just be no swaps and maybe a higher sell price for duplicates. Done.

crackninja

Borstock said:

The whole swapping policy was a dumb idea. They never should've implemented it in the first place. It should just be no swaps and maybe a higher sell price for duplicates. Done.

Was it though?  From a customer service resource perspective, definitely a time sink.   From a happy customer perspective, I think it goes a long long way.
They likely want to retain the (credible) authority to revoke this policy and therefore do not wish to build in logic that would remove the need for CS to get involved.
My feeling is that swapping in these limited release vaults would solve the classic 5* dilution problem.  If they always rotate in 2 new classics in these, I have a shot at any classic 5* I want to finish about once a year.  As it stands, I'm just never finishing most of my classics, especially the ones that are some variation of 4-1-1.  I know that chasing them is foolish without cover swaps, yet they are almost half covered.
As for the options offered, my preferences are i, iii, ii, iv.

JHawkInc

The kicker is, this isn't a problem. The free to play business model wants you to have wasted resources sometimes, because that puts pressure on you to spend money to save those resources. The only reason we have swaps at all is because the math is not conducive to whaling (you could spend thousands and fail to acquire a fully built new character, so swaps means you only have to get 13 covers to be able to champ them). Swaps only happen for Latest because those are the only characters whales are chasing. It's a customer service method to account for whale distaste with the game model's end game math.

So we aren't going to get swaps for Classics, or tokens with only Latest + New characters in them, OR colorless covers, because those all go against the basic concept of how free to play business models work. I, II, and IV all take away the pressure to spend, and so they aren't viable solutions (regardless of how well players would like them from their end, you can't risk hurting the business model and killing the game in the process). III might work, but I suspect the cost to re-roll would be higher than people like.

The reality is that as long as it works for the business side of things, it isn't going to change.

crackninja

Seems like the current method discourages spending, because any investment in the limited release vaults isn't insured.
What is the market, really, for green goblin these days? I would think they would be happy people were willing to spend 25cp at a shot to get older 5*'s, even if it meant allowing cover swaps for these special vaults specifically.

Borstock

crackninja said:

Borstock said:

The whole swapping policy was a dumb idea. They never should've implemented it in the first place. It should just be no swaps and maybe a higher sell price for duplicates. Done.

Was it though?  From a customer service resource perspective, definitely a time sink.   From a happy customer perspective, I think it goes a long long way.
They likely want to retain the (credible) authority to revoke this policy and therefore do not wish to build in logic that would remove the need for CS to get involved.
My feeling is that swapping in these limited release vaults would solve the classic 5* dilution problem.  If they always rotate in 2 new classics in these, I have a shot at any classic 5* I want to finish about once a year.  As it stands, I'm just never finishing most of my classics, especially the ones that are some variation of 4-1-1.  I know that chasing them is foolish without cover swaps, yet they are almost half covered.
As for the options offered, my preferences are i, iii, ii, iv.

Yes, it was. People are upset either way. They will always want more. You're a good example. You're here, right now, wanting more. 

Dogface

I thought it was quite clear. Only duplicate 5* from latest, and even then not always. Let's just keep it at that.

crackninja

Borstock said:

crackninja said:

Borstock said:

The whole swapping policy was a dumb idea. They never should've implemented it in the first place. It should just be no swaps and maybe a higher sell price for duplicates. Done.

Was it though?  From a customer service resource perspective, definitely a time sink.   From a happy customer perspective, I think it goes a long long way.
They likely want to retain the (credible) authority to revoke this policy and therefore do not wish to build in logic that would remove the need for CS to get involved.
My feeling is that swapping in these limited release vaults would solve the classic 5* dilution problem.  If they always rotate in 2 new classics in these, I have a shot at any classic 5* I want to finish about once a year.  As it stands, I'm just never finishing most of my classics, especially the ones that are some variation of 4-1-1.  I know that chasing them is foolish without cover swaps, yet they are almost half covered.
As for the options offered, my preferences are i, iii, ii, iv.

Yes, it was. People are upset either way. They will always want more. You're a good example. You're here, right now, wanting more. 

Well if wanting things is a bad thing then I suppose I'm guilty of that, but I'm sure not apologizing for it.

I want to be able to spend purchased and earned resources on characters that are no longer in vogue, just because I like Silver Surfer (1-1-5) and Phoenix (4-1-1), without it being a completely irrational decision relative to how the rest of the game works.

I'm not here whining or demanding anything.  I certainly could choose to spend 4,320 and 5,040 cp respectively to finish them, use the bonus hero option to net 2-3 covers a year, and for some 5's focus on their 4* feeder.  That freedom is awesome.

I am thankful the current policy exists.  If they stop doing it tomorrow then I'll be disappointed, but so be it.  You haven't made any argument that actually supports that it was a mistake, or shows that They believe it was, so I'll just leave it at that.

bluewolf

The new release stores, remember, changed from a single 5 - so 10% shot at JJ - to the current 3x5* model.  (Edited: I mistakenly put 15% as the odds under the single 5 store)

If you are of a mind to whale or chase a Classic 5, the new model helps you there since you aren’t stuck with the abysmal dilution.  If you wanted to get the newest 5 running, your spending requirement tripled under this model.  So it depends somewhat on your approach, but the current store model helps both devs and players in different ways.

In terms of swaps, the other issue for the Classic 5’s that are offered alongside is that the CS team would have no quick way to determine if the cover came from a Classic pull or a new store pull.  And so one could wait to pull Classics during a new release store and game the system if swaps were allowed.

Another point about Latest swaps is that the CP cost difference is not negligible; so the whole Latest swap thing is there for whales and also, to me, to reflect that the player has given up 20% of their pulls in exchange for trying for the newest 5’s.  The fact that Classic dilution makes it foolish to try to cover a 5 from 0/0/0 is a different problem, but you certainly can get your 4’s a lot higher if you pull Classics.  So it is a kindness to players to help them chase 5’s in the more expensive store.

spectator

I think it was 10% when it was a single 5

Doc L

Okay, to be clear, first, the policy they have currently is clear, Latest only for swaps. My point here was, this was essentially a special Latest token I won, and indeed, Jessica isn't even in Latest yet either, yet they specifically chose to swap her, and not the other two. It seems ridiculous not to plan for this scenario, when they have (and it may be semantics) made a special case for Jessica herself. You can't win a token to give you a useless 5* in any other part of the game (CP you spend on what you want is different), so why is it here?

Second, it's not necessarily following a free-to-play model by not swapping. Games like, Marvel: War of Heroes (way more money-centred than this), or Star Wars: Galaxy of Heroes, had mechanisms in place to deal with characters/covers etc you didn't want anymore. It's a service to the player, that you can build into the game, that means they progress, and spend more money due to longevity. I really simple fix is to change the sell value of the covers, and that would be that. 

I mean, I know from a while back, that the Developers do not like the idea of cover swapping, and indeed, don't want it in the game (this may have changed - I'll be kitty'd if I could find the comments now after so long), so if anything, the mechanism will be ended eventually. Thing is, if I spend X hours grinding to get something worthless, I'm way less likely to continue on spending on this (or any other game for that matter) like this. Does it make me sound a little entitled? Probably. But given the time-sink spent to earn some of these rewards, I think we are a little entitled to at least useable rewards - and anyone telling me 2,000 iso I will get for selling the cover is worthwhile...